Forgive me if I am wrong, but the only real advantage to the Epson 2100 is that it is the first desktop machine to use the ultra long life pigment ink set? I have been looking very closely at this machine for that very reason.
I currently have the Canon S9000 which is faster ( 1 min v 5 min for A4), cheaper (GBP 350 v 440 + VAT), uses less ink and having spent an hour comparing test files from both machines with an 8x loupe yesterday, equal in quality. The only possible reason for buying the Epson is my requirement for pigment ink life. Both printers can be fitted with CIS systems to use Lyson ink ( which is excellent), but why use Lysonic in a 2100 when it can be used in the cheaper 1160 or 1290 or better still, in the faster Canon ? Nick WB. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nick Wilcox-Brown, Photographer W: www.NickWB.com > Jack, the two inkset options we are evaluating is a Lyson pigment+dye > inkset, which seems to emulate Epson Ultrachrome in testing, > and the traditional Lyson Fotonic dye-based inkset in seven > channels, which Lyson have successfully produced for a number > of years, and is very much a known quantity.. > It appears that this printer, while having great features, is > VERY thirsty on ink. Buying Epson cartridge inks at around > �1000 / Litre makes this printer rather expensive, whereas > when you run it with a bulk feed system, your costs can be > as low as �70 / Litre when using bulk inks bought in > 1 Litre bottles... > > Many Epson 2100 customers have been complaining > of metamerism with the pigment Epson inks, which we find > is virtually eliminated with the Lyson Fotonic ink option. =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
